Core i3/i5 review @ anandtech

[edplayer]

when every review site has made it clear that for enthusiasts/gamers even the 660 is a stupid choice compared to the 750 then who in their right mind would spend even more for the 670.

Someone that likes messing around with computers as a hobby and isn't constrained by a tiny budget?

he did start a thread and it looks like he didnt get a 670 anyway so kudos for him for not being that dumb.

Did you read the thread or just look at the pictures?

 

[toyota]

Someone that likes messing around with computers as a hobby and isn't constrained by a tiny budget?





Did you read the thread or just look at the pictures?

well he keeps saying that certain things are not needed such as a quad yet he is spending more money to get less so he can overclock it to match or beat the cheaper stock quad. thats about as stupid as buying a 4 cylinder to squeeze the life out of it to match a V8 that actually costs less in the first place. unless you live in bizarro world, you buy the cheaper and better performing product.

yes I looked at his thread earlier when he posted it so what are you asking?

 

[Hey Zeus]

well he keeps saying that certain things are not needed such as a quad yet he is spending more money to get less so he can overclock it to match or beat the cheaper stock quad. thats about as stupid as buying a 4 cylinder to squeeze the life out of it to match a V8 that actually costs less in the first place. unless you live in bizarro world, you buy the cheaper and better performing product.

yes I looked at his thread earlier when he posted it so what are you asking?

I'm actually buying both. The 540 came today and i should have the 670 in a few days.

Where did i say i was overclocking the 670 to beat a quad? I don't care if it beats a quad. I just want to play over 5Ghz

 

[grimpr]

Okay show me a better source, oh and yeah tell me how a driver should increase the performance, I'm really interested in that.

Two very interesting claims, but it's nothing new that you claim something and then never answer it..

Actually he is telling half the truth by mixing and spinning it with what the REAL GPU vendors do, offload as much work from the CPU to the GPU through their drivers. Intels IGP is so crap that it offloads to the CPU to help bring up the numbers in vantage and gaming.

All revealed by mr.Schuette at LostCircuits.

Enjoy.

"The bottom line here is that depending on the contents/workload, and maybe some driver optimizations, Intel has found a way to offload a major portion of the iGFX workload to the CPU cores, which reflects in a substantial performance increase. If the CPU - for whatever reasons - cannot be recruited by the iGFX, graphics performance drops substantially. For the record, in the case of the Phenom II X4 965 BE/ 785G combo, the CPU utilization stayed at about 0% during the entire course of the benchmarks."


http://www.lostcircuits.com/mambo//...task=view&id=74&Itemid=1&limit=1&limitstart=5

http://www.lostcircuits.com/mambo//...ask=view&id=74&Itemid=42&limit=1&limitstart=6

http://images.nvidia.com/blogs/ntersect/feature_image09.jpg

 

[DrMrLordX]

I am very curious to see how a 3.33 GHz i5 (with HT AND Turbo turned OFF) compares against the E8600...

I am quite certain that the E8600 is a faster processor (because it has 6mb L2 cache) and that the i5 NEEDS HT and Turbo to actually beat the E8600...

Why would you say that? The basis for all Clarksdale chips is a core derived from Nehalem, an architecture that has already been proven to have a higher ipc than Wolfdale on a per-core basis. Granted, part of Nehalem's advantage is the integrated memory controller which is not such an advantage for Clarksdale, but the architectural differences are still significant. The E8600's L2 cache isn't quite the asset you think that it is in such a comparison.

If you really want to see what Clarksdale is like as compared to Wolfdale, find a review of the new Pentium G9650, which has less L3 than i3 or i5 Clarksdales and no Hyperthreading. Hopefully a Wolfdale would be included in the benchmark as a comparison.

That being said, there's no reason to believe that Turbo mode or Hyperthreading somehow produce a false representation of Clarksdale's true performance potential. Those features are implemented the way they are for a reason, and I can assure you that whatever advantage is afforded by Turbo and HT are legitimately a part of whatever makes Clarksdale faster than Wolfdale. Whether or not Clarksdale "needs" such technology to be faster (I would contend that it does not), the fact is that Clarksdale is the faster chip, period. If you don't believe me, go look at people on XS with heavily-overclocked Clarksdales beating Conroe/Wolfdale chips in 1M SuperPi benchmarks, where Turbo is generally disabled (or non-functional) and HT is not a factor due to the single-threaded nature of SuperPi.

Then take a look at the 32M benches in SuperPi and watch Clarksdale suffer thanks to its limited ability to accomodate memory overclocks at high BCLK settings.

Does that make Wolfdale faster than Clarksdale? Under LN2, when running SuperPi 32M, maybe. Back down near stock speeds, where Clarksdale's memory speed limitations are less pronounced, things aren't so bad for young Clarky, especially when running applications that are multi-threaded.

Like you I'd almost rather get a cheap AMD quad than a Clarksdale, but there's no way in hell I'd ever consider a Wolfdale unless I planned on doing 32M SuperPi suicide runs.

 

[Hey Zeus]

Enjoyed reading the reviews!

However there is one test none of the review sites looked into.

I am very curious to see how a 3.33 GHz i5 (with HT AND Turbo turned OFF) compares against the E8600...

I am quite certain that the E8600 is a faster processor (because it has 6mb L2 cache) and that the i5 NEEDS HT and Turbo to actually beat the E8600...

Intel and AMD are using interesting stratgeies. Intel uses a dual core and adds features (Graphics, HT, Turbo) and AMD takes a quad and removes features (No L3 cache).

Now AMD is just about to launch 6 new CPUs. They will have Athlon II x4 2.9 GHz and Athlon II x3 3.0 GHz.

It will be interesting to see which strategy is the better one...

But I know which one is cheaper! 4 cores in 45nm vs. 2 cores in 32 + 1 gpu in 45nm...

Which cpu would I buy? Either the i5 750 or a Phenom II x4. Both are awesome chips, fast at whatever task you throw at them.

What cpu do I have? A cheap Athlon II 250 3 GHz dual core, running at 3.5 GHz

Phil,

I just posted a thread about the I3's vs the E8500/E8600's. I3 540 beat the E8600 in 17 out of the 25 benchmarks they tested them in.

 

[cbn]

Someone that likes messing around with computers as a hobby and isn't constrained by a tiny budget?

Yep, What Hey Zeus has planned sounds pretty interesting. I would like to see the benchmarks for "academic" reasons if anything else.

 

[TurtleCrusher]

+1

+2

The only thing that's interesting about these CPUs is the decent onboard graphics.

 

[edplayer]

yes I looked at his thread earlier when he posted it so what are you asking?

well he already posted it but within that thread it says the 670 is on order

You need to read the words, not just look at the pictures...

 

[toyota]

well he already posted it but within that thread it says the 670 is on order

You need to read the words, not just look at the pictures...

and did you stop to think that he said that AFTER I originally looked at the thread?

 

[edplayer]

No, I just looked at your post and then decided to make another post about it eight hours later without reading anything

 

[ajaidev]

I want confirmation that i3+H55 can do 6-8 LPCM over HDMI it may turn into a very good HTPC box for me.

The fit-PC2i i pre ordered may just get canned, but since my AV receiver is old does not support Dolby TrueHD or DTS-HD the only thing it supports is 6ch LPCM over HDMI. Now i know both DTS-HD and Dolby TrueHD can be sent as 6ch channel linear PCM but in that case they use the receiver's DAC extensively and is not as great as the real LPCM?

 

[Voo]

Actually he is telling half the truth by mixing and spinning it with what the REAL GPU vendors do, offload as much work from the CPU to the GPU through their drivers. Intels IGP is so crap that it offloads to the CPU to help bring up the numbers in vantage and gaming.

Interesting.. that's probably the sadest thing I've read in a while. Using the CPU for graphics stuff is probably one of the most inefficient things you can do, so much for the "improved Intel IGP"..

But it shouldn't affect the cpu in any way in the other benchmarks or when using a other GPU, nevertheless interesting read thanks.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Good now were getting somewhere. Those who would use this as a tool against Intel for off loading IGP work to the Cpu should also know that this in not a one way street. With a little research you shall find that Intel also plans on driver updates that will off load some Cpu work to the GPU. Intel is preparing those drivers. This little Die has much to offer that were not yet seeing . Do some research .

 

[Nemesis 1]

How this relates I leave it to you. anyway its interesting just as interesting as the differance between Nehalem Conroe instructions that do those 7 little instructions. what do they do. besides what we know.

http://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/parallel-studio-getting-started-demo-video/

 

[grimpr]

Good now were getting somewhere. Those who would use this as a tool against Intel for off loading IGP work to the Cpu should also know that this in not a one way street. With a little research you shall find that Intel also plans on driver updates that will off load some Cpu work to the GPU. Intel is preparing those drivers. This little Die has much to offer that were not yet seeing . Do some research .

You still cant comprehend that Intels solution for its pathetic IGP's perfomance in games/3d is offloading to the CPU cores through the drivers. Nothing new exactly, it has been many times used in the past.

Noone said anything about the cpu core, the core as it is, is superb. The failure comes from putting the IMC to the IGP die as to help this relic IGP to show some potential. Thats why almost all enthusiasts and power users excluding nostalgic overclockers from a long bygone era, kinda like those japanese ww2 soldiers stranded in forgotten pacific islands believing that the war marched on, wont touch the Clarkdale with a ten foot pole.

Now excuse us, but we prefer the 480sp, 4670 equivalent, on die fused ATI GPU on AMDs 80$-100$ Llano.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Well if anyone is suffering from comprehension failure it is you . What part don't you understand . Intel IGP on clarkdale is very good and the Majority of users will love them . It is only a small percentage of users who care anything at all about what your talking about. This same very small % of users that have to have the Best like yourself are the same people that Use cheat hacks because they suck so badly at game play.

I enjoy gaming very much but its hard for me. It is even made harder by peeps who just can't play without their hacks a small majority true . But still very disturbing.

I read the threads Many NV fans love the idea of GPGPU yet you ignor the fact drivers are all thats needed for intel to offload cpu work to the gpu . You also fail to understand the cadence of Gpu design and have overlooked the fact that Intel is aware of this cadence. I doubt intel will go to a 32nm with Igp on Clarksdale but it is possiable . In six months, Thats something well have to wait and see . Overall Intel did very well. Nost users are going to be very happy . Than the fact that it comes undie with cpu is just a +++ for consumers has flown right over your head. Intels IGP will be a top seller for this very reason . Add in the fact that it plays back blue ray and the consumers are going to be very pleased with intel. Lets wait and see how Clarkdale does in the consumer market on both the moble and desktop arenea . All tho most people understand this is a win win for intel and the consumer . Than of course you fail to understand the importance of the hydra chip which is no more vapor ware than Fermi neither are available YET.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Well so much for calling Hydra Vapor ware

http://www.guru3d.com/article/msi-big-bang-fuzion-lucid-hydra-review-test/

 

[v8envy]

This same very small % of users that have to have the Best like yourself are the same people that Use cheat hacks because they suck so badly at game play.

Did you just imply every hardware enthusiast cheats at online games? The mind boggles.

Just because something is "good enough" for the average uninformed consumer doesn't mean there isn't a better, equivalent cost option. It's our duty as hardware *enthusiasts* to promote the better solution, not just sheepishly drool along with the "it's good enough for Aunt Mabel, it's good enough for you" mindset.

The new i3 looks to be a wonderful budget CPU for extremely low cost basic desktops. Unfortunately, it currently has a pricetag which makes it less than competitive with other non-entry level options. At least IMO. Once these bad boys are down in the $60 range, yeah, the only way to fly. Until then there are better options.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Ya I reread that . Thats how it did sound. But no not all just way to many hacks. As for the rest . Give intel alittle time to work on drivers OK. You know how this works with me . I wait than when everthing is working properly I come back and grab these topics.

You wait for ATI ?NV driver updates . Do the same for intel. This little gpu in not to distant future will be doing CPU work just as the Cpu is doing GPU work at present . I can't help it if so many have 4 core Cpus that just don't have enough desktop support at the moment . Intel did well here and Did not target us . To buy these but the consumer . Would you like to wager how these do in the consumer market I would . I would bet the house its going to be a hugh success.

Have the Hardware sites all turned into to just for the 2% crowd . Thats to bad . The consumer willl decide not me not you not XS or AT. The consumer

 

[Hey Zeus]

Did you just imply every hardware enthusiast cheats at online games? The mind boggles.

Just because something is "good enough" for the average uninformed consumer doesn't mean there isn't a better, equivalent cost option. It's our duty as hardware *enthusiasts* to promote the better solution, not just sheepishly drool along with the "it's good enough for Aunt Mabel, it's good enough for you" mindset.

The new i3 looks to be a wonderful budget CPU for extremely low cost basic desktops. Unfortunately, it currently has a pricetag which makes it less than competitive with other non-entry level options. At least IMO. Once these bad boys are down in the $60 range, yeah, the only way to fly. Until then there are better options.

For 150 dollars the I3 is a wannabe quad core at a dual core price

 

[Nemesis 1]

Hey Zeus I am going to Buy that MSI fusion M/B as soon as its released to go with the i570. I like that auto overlike and can't wait to see were it O/C these things to. It will be a great Browser PC. All be it expensive . But I have had this browser for what seems to be eternity. It was very expensive when I built it way back in o4.

It will be fun and cheaper than what it cost me in 04 by half . To me thats a great deal . Just depends onn ones perspective I gues . I am skipping the 6 core Since I have the 4 core nehalem . I'll wait on Sandy for next upgrade. I must be doing something right I am getting stronger every day . Thank you Mexico. .

 

[v8envy]

For 150 dollars the I3 is a wannabe quad core at a dual core price

For $99 the 620 is a quad core at a dual core price too.

I dunno, guess I've been spoiled. I'm enjoying my $199 quad core just fine. And, btw, it can also hit 4 ghz at 1.25v or possibly less -- just yesterday I cranked my i7 920 to 200 mhz base clock & stock voltage, lowered the memory divider, disabled hyperthreading and turbo to see if it'd boot and lo, it did.

Anyone spending the kind of cash you laid out on a top shelf board and cooling can probably cough up a few more dollars for an i7 + socket 1366. People wanting a 5 ghz i3 level of performance are better served with the much cheaper i5 and cheaper board.

I still say these will kick butt with cheap H55 boards once they shed about 50% of their current price though. 2XXX series all over again!

 

[Hey Zeus]

For $99 the 620 is a quad core at a dual core price too.

I dunno, guess I've been spoiled. I'm enjoying my $199 quad core just fine. And, btw, it can also hit 4 ghz at 1.25v or possibly less -- just yesterday I cranked my i7 920 to 200 mhz base clock & stock voltage, lowered the memory divider, disabled hyperthreading and turbo to see if it'd boot and lo, it did.

Anyone spending the kind of cash you laid out on a top shelf board and cooling can probably cough up a few more dollars for an i7 + socket 1366. People wanting a 5 ghz i3 level of performance are better served with the much cheaper i5 and cheaper board.

I still say these will kick butt with cheap H55 boards once they shed about 50% of their current price though. 2XXX series all over again!

I'm actually very interested what a 620 and 530 will do against a 4Ghz+ Clarkdale

 

[cbn]

Exerpt from article: Seven 32nm, quad-core processors are also listed, all with 12MB of cache -- the Xeon X5677 (3.46GHz, 130W), X5667 (3.06GHz, 95W), E5640 (2.66GHz, 80W), E5630 (2.53Hz, 80W), E5620 (2.40GHz, 80W), L5630 (2.13GHz, 40W), L5609 (1.86GHz, 40W). All of those chips, with the exception of the Xeon L5609, have eight threads, Hyperthreading and Turbo Boost.

I am sure a lot of people are wondering what the price of L5609 will be?

32nm, quadcore, 12MB L3 cache should work well with a lot of applications.